Friday, August 12, 2016

Trump talk

The Stone factor. Here's a hilarious comparison: Time offers a good (though not ground-breaking) piece titled "Inside Donald Trump's Meltdown." The article delivers a surprising quote from Trump's not-so-hidden master schemer, Roger Stone...
Trump goes with his gut, and when his instincts betray him, no one can rein him in. “No one puts words in his mouth, and nobody decides what he says other than him,” says longtime adviser Roger Stone. “Politics is nine-tenths discipline.”
Discipline? Since when did Roger Stone gain the right to speak of discipline? That guy has all the discipline of the Joker on a coke binge.

Stone -- not Trump -- is the guy who kicked the Khan controversy into high gear, by drawing attention to an absurd conspiratorial concoction about the family's supposed links to the Muslim Brotherhood. Stone claimed that a slain hero -- a man who gave his life for his fellow soldiers when they came under attack by a suicide bomber -- was actually a hidden jihadist agent.

Stone spewed that toxic nonsense because he was acting according to his instincts: Attack attack attack. Smear, smear, smear. Never apologize. Never back down.

There's a difference between instinct and discipline.

A disciplined campaign would have known how to turn the Khan controversy to Trump's advantage. If I were in Stone's position, I would have told Donald Trump -- and his campaign -- how to react to the Khans' DNC appearance. This was an occasion for humility, for the admission of past mistakes, followed by a rapid but devastating embrace of the peacenik position (thereby winning some Sanders supporters). Had Trump spoken the words that I would have put into his mouth, and had his surrogates stayed on message, Donald Trump would now be in the lead.

Roger "the Disciplinarian" Stone believes that insane conspiracy theories will carry the day. That's his bet. That's his strategy.

His main focus now concerns assassination theories. In particular: Stone now wants you to believe that the Evil Clinton Conspiracy had four people murdered. The victims were (relatively speaking) Charlie Nobodies, yet Stone wants you to think that these people so freakin' important that the Clinton conspiracy had 'em rubbed out.

Odd, isn't it? For all this talk of Clinton Kill Counts, none of their real enemies -- from Starr to Klayman to Tripp to Stone himself -- ever seem to be in danger.

Incidentally, one of the alleged Clinton murder victims is one Victor Thorn, a good friend to Roger Stone. Many people don't know that Thorn was a fascist thug.
Thorn worked for the virulently anti-Semitic publication American Free Press. The site announced Thorn’s death on August 1; a staff write-up stated that Thorn’s family said “there was no evidence of foul play at the scene and that Thorn most likely took his own life.”

Thorn wasn’t just an anti-Clinton writer; he was also a prominent Holocaust denier and anti-Semite. Thorn wrote the book The Holo­caust Hoax Exposed: Debunk­ing the 20th Century's Biggest Lie, which claims to expose "the mythology surrounding 'concentration camps,' the truth about [concentration camp gas] Zyklon B, Anne Frank's fable, how the absurd 'six million' figure has become a laughingstock, and the betrayal by maniacal Zionists of their own Jewish people that led to their deaths." Thorn also blamed a "Jewish plot" for the 9/11 attacks.

Mark Potok, a senior fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center, told the Daily Dot that “Thorn was akin to being a Nazi and was certainly a Nazi apologist.” Despite that background, Stone dedicated his book to Thorn -- and now he’s claiming the Clintons killed him.
Thorn and Stone go back. Stone and Trump go back. For any Democrat, the association would be damning. Why is Trump allowed to get away with such things?

My prediction: Everyone is worrying about the Trump campaign's upcoming October Surprise. Few doubt that such a surprise is in the works. To paraphrase the old song: Something's comin', something bad.

That's one reason why the Dems are trying their damnedest to end Trump's political viability right here and now. It's also, I suspect, one reason why hostile Trump biographer David Cay Johnston still thinks (as I do) that Trump can pull off a victory, as surreal as that idea may seem at the moment.

I think that the October Surprise will be the revelation of "proof" that Hillary Clinton ordered an assassination.

Here's my argument:

1. The Trump forces have suggested that the Russians already possess emails deleted from Hillary's account.

(Side note: Recently, Trump has said that Hillary did the deleting -- a statement for which there is no evidence. In fact, we know that the FBI recovered a number of those messages, which were apparently innocent.)

2. The preceding post demonstrates that the Trumpers -- or should I say, the Stoners -- are willing to create false documents.

3. Roger Stone is doubling down on the "Killer Clinton" meme. Why? Because assassination is sexy. It's bloody, it's visceral, it's shocking, it's the kind of claim that is easily comprehended by even the dumbest dummy in Dummyland. Everyone knows that Stone has a fascination with assassination lore -- after all, he used to work for Arlen Specter, and he went on to write a crappy-but-popular book about the JFK assassination. Plus, Stone can get the word out via Alex Jones' maniac network.

Put those three reasons together, and you will understand why I am forecasting that Team Trump (or rather, Team Putin) will use Wikileaks to foist a "damning" email on the world which will seem to prove that Hillary had someone whacked.

I think that this will hit us somewhere in the October 20th - October 30th time period. The Democrats have to be ready now.

You can be sure that the fake message will be "backstopped" (as the spooks like to say). That is: The sole piece of evidence will not be a few faked emails. There will be more -- an additional "something" designed to provide the illusion of verification. Perhaps a witness or two (either paid or blackmailed) will come forward.

If my guess is right, the "Killer Clinton" accusation won't be anything like that bogus "medical report" from Hillary's doctor, as discussed in our previous post. I don't think that there will be any obvious tells. Nothing sloppy. We are talking about professional-quality work done in Moscow, not at the Mar-a-Lago.

About the "Second Amendment people" gaffe. Trump now wants the world to believe that he was referring to the voting power -- not the firepower -- exercised by those "Second Amendment people."


Listen to the words that Trump speaks directly after his instantly-infamous remark. He goes on to say: "I'll tell you why. That will be a horrible day." (Go here. It's a little after the one-minute mark.) That sentence -- "That will be a horrible day" -- has received far too little publicity, which has, in turn, allowed Trump to mischaracterize his meaning.

Think about it. If Trump really were talking about the voting power of gun owners, then why would he add "That will be a horrible day"? What would be "horrible" about voting?

Aside from the brutal, Nazi-like nature of Trump's statement, we also have to pay some attention to one very basic fact: The guy is lying.

Just plain lying.

Hillary has no designs on the Second Amendment. She could do nothing about that amendment even if she wanted to. Changing a Constitutional amendment is a long and difficult process -- if I recall aright, there is only one precedent: The repeal of Prohibition.

No one person -- not even a president -- can get rid of the Second Amendment.

If the Republicans don't like her choice of judges, they can block her nominees. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that something of this sort is happening right now...
And the people who will believe your hypothetical bombshell will be--the people who were never going to vote for Clinton anyway.

While pretty much the entire national security establishment--which can tell the Corporate Media to jump and the Corporate Media will say, "How high, SIR?"--has lined up behind Clinton.

The bombshell will fizzle.

If Putin is as smart as he is supposed to be, he will realize this, and start mending fences with our Iron Lady with all possible speed.
I think Trump's second amendment comment was innocent. I think it's pretty clear he's saying there might be a way for the "second amendment people" to block anti-gun justices that Clinton nominates. He's wondering aloud whether Clinton winning the election necessarily means she gets whatever justices she wants. He's wondering whether the gun lobby can block the nominees. He had been talking about the gun lobby - the second amendment people - in the lead-up to that comment.

And the "horrible day" is clearly a reference to the day Clinton is elected. Look at what he says after that point. The context makes it clear.

Still, it amazes me that the campaign offered an explanation of his comment that makes no sense ("he was talking about voting"), instead of the explanation I offered above, which does make sense. That's evidence of either sheer incompetence or a dog whistle.
"Aside from the brutal, Nazi-like nature of Trump's statement, we also have to pay some attention to one very basic fact: The guy is lying."

Yes. The call for assassination was the wrapper. The underlying message is that Clinton the Devil is hell-bent on taking away the guns.

@Anon 4.58 - "Block the nominees"? The only lawful way the gun lobby can do that is through the Senate. I don't think Trump meant to convey the thoroughly peaceful message "Please remember to vote Republicans or NRA-friendly Democrats into the Senate even if you vote the Devil into the White House".
The Clinton side's counterplay to a Trumpite October Surprise could be...war with Russia. A military confrontation with Putin could leave Trump with no ground to stand on, knocking him out of the race. The BBC may possibly be preparing its audience for just such a confrontation, starting in Aleppo.

Which is all the more reason for people to cooperate in getting Trump out as a matter of urgency, hopefully in August.
I suspect that Trump campaign's credibility is vanishing rapidly. God only knows what kind of shape he'll be in by late October. While I believe that an October surprise may be coming, the likelihood it will be of any consequence relies completely on Donald holding what he has at this moment is low.
i think the National Enquirer will break the fake story, with pictures and screamingly huge headlines. Yes, a couple of weeks in a row could be enough to sway 3 to 5% to reverse their vote. So even a 9% Clinton lead could be in jeopardy.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?